Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät · The Condition of Democracy and the Fate of...

International Conference 11th-13th July 2019Wissenschaftsetage im Bildungsforum Potsdam

THE CONDITION OF DEMOCRACY AND THE FATE OF CITIZENSHIP

Wirtschafts- undSozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät

International Conference 11th-13th July 2019Wissenschaftsetage im Bildungsforum Potsdam

Table of Contents

Overview ............................................................................................ 3

Programme Schedule ........................................................................ 6

Abstracts ..........................................................................................10

Participants .....................................................................................2 6

The Condition of Democracy and the Fate of Citizenship

The Centre for Citizenship, Social Pluralism and Religious Diversity is a space of international critical and vivid sociological and interdiscipli-nary debate on today’s world’s major economic, political, social and cultural problems and challenges. Its 2019 international conference aims at reviewing and elucidating the basic conditions, foundations and future prospects of liberal democracy in order to understand, explain and discuss crucial and pressing questions of citizens’ rights to participate in political life. The first decades of the 21st Century have yet again revealed the vulnerability and fragility of democracy and its core institution, citizenship. With a focus on the transformed political-economic foundations of Western democratic societies, the dynamics and mechanisms of the emergence of “illiberal” democra-cies, an analysis of (counter-)democratic movements and develop-ments in the Middle East and a discussion of the interdependencies of issues as diverse as big data, popular culture, violence and war, the conference brings together scholars from around the globe to discuss the Condition of Democracy and the Fate of Citizenship.

Overview

Wirtschafts- undSozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät

4 The Condition of Democracy and the Fate of Citizenship

Programme Schedule: Overview

Thursday, July 11

12:00 – 13:00

13:00 – 13:30

13:30 – 13:50

14:00 – 15:00

15:30 – 17:05

17:20 – 18:20

19:30

Friday, July 12

10:15 – 11:55

13:00 – 14:00

14:15 – 16:40

Registration

Welcome Addresses 4.24a

Introduction 4.24a

Keynote 4.24a

Can Citizenship Save Democracy From Market Justice?

Why Karl Polanyi is the Necessary Thinker for Our Times

Parallel Sessions

Session 1: The Impact of Neolinberalism on Democracy 4.24a

Session 2: Western Democracy and War in the Middle and Far East 4.24b

Session 3: Democracy and the Authority of Experts 4.25

Keynote 4.24a

Enchaining Democracy:

The Now-Transnational Project of the Radical Libertarian Right

Conference Dinner for Speakers

Parallel Sessions

Session 4: The EU and Democracy 4.24a

Session 5: The Political Economy and New Governance 4.24b

Session 6: Democracy, Trust and Conflict 4.25

Keynote

The Abuses and Uses of the Discourse of Rights in the Case of Palestine 4.24a

Parallel Sessions

Session 7: Illiberal Politics in Western Democratic Regimes 4.24a

Session 8: Democracy under a State of Emergency? 4.24b

Session 9: Migration: Withholding Basic Rights of Refugees 4.25

5International Conference 11th-13th July 2019

17:25 – 19:00

Saturday, July 13

10:00 – 11:00

11:10 – 12:45

14:00 – 14:30

Parallel Sessions

Session 10: The Demise of Democracy in Turkey 4.24a

Session 11: Prospects of Democratic Movements in Northern Africa and

the Middle East 4.24b

Session 12: Fighting for Democracy and Citizenship Rights 4.25

Keynote

Democratic Participation and the Violence of Politics: Towards a Post-

Weberian Enlightenment 4.24a

Parallel Sessions

Session 13: Democracy under Right-Wing Governments 4.24a

Session 14: Democracy and the Permanence of Violence 4.24b

Session 15: Democracy and the Permanence of Colonialism 4.25

Conclusion 4.24a


Comprehensive Programme Schedule

Thursday, July 11

12:00 – 13:00

13:00 – 13:30

13:30 – 13:50

14:00 – 15:00

15:00 – 15:25

15:30 – 17:05

Registration

Welcome Addresses

Florian Schweigert Vice President for International Affairs,

Alumni and Fundraising, Univeristy of Potsdam

Jürgen Mackert Co-Director Centre for Citizenship, University of Potsdam 4.24a

Introduction

Bryan S. Turner University of Potsdam/ Australian Catholic University 4.24a

Keynote 4.24a

Margaret R. Somers University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Can Citizenship Save Democracy From Market Justice?

Why Karl Polanyi is the Necessary Thinker for Our Times

Coffee Break

Parallel Sessions

Session 1: The Impact of Neolinberalism on Democracy 4.24a

Joseph Vogl Humboldt University Berlin: The Financial Regime

Bob Jessop Lancaster University: The Political Crisis

of Neoliberalization and Multi-Spatial Meta-Governance

Session 2: Western Democracy and War in the Middle and Far East 4.24b

Martha Mundy London School of Economics:

Beyond Legal Referent: The Yemen War

Tim Anderson University of Sydney:

How Colonial Intervention Destroys Democracy at Home and Abroad

Session 3: Democracy and the Authority of Experts 4.25

Stephen Turner University of Southern Florida:

The Ideology of Anti-Populism and the Administrative State

Christian Schmidt-Wellenburg University of Potsdam:

Drawing on Different Sources of Authority: The Changing Nature

of Economic Expertise in Eurocracy


17:20 – 18:20

19:30

Friday, July 12

10:15 – 11:55

12:00 – 13:00

13:00 – 14:00

Keynote 4.24a

Nancy MacLean Duke University:

Enchaining Democracy:

The Now-Transnational Project of the Radical Libertarian Right

Conference Dinner for Speakers

Parallel Sessions

Session 4: The EU and Democracy 4.24a

Peo Hansen Linköping University: Refugee Reception or Welfare

State Sustainability, or Both? Explaining Sound Finance’s Toxic

Impact on Migration Politics and Policy in the European Union

Vedran Dzihic University of Vienna: Authoritarian Populist

Nationalism as a Threat to European Democracies. Conceptual

Considerations and Empirical Insights

Session 5: The Political Economy and New Governance 4.24b

Thomas Biebricher Goethe-University Frankfurt:

The Problem of Democracy: Neoliberal Critoques and

the Impossibility of Reform

Jürgen Mackert University of Potsdam: The Legacy of Liberalism

and the De-democratization of Modern Society

Session 6: Democracy, Trust and Conflict 4.25

Tibor Desewffy Eötvös Loránd University Budapest:

May the Revitalization of Politics come from Popular Culture?

Eddie Hartmann University of Potsdam and

Felix Lang University of Potsdam:

The Crisis of Social Trust in Nonviolent Routines.

The Rise of Right-Wing Political Violence in Germany

Lunch

Keynote 4.24a

Ilan Pappe University of Exeter:

The Abuses and Uses of the Discourse of Rights in the Case of Palestine


Parallel Sessions

Session 7: Illiberal Politics in Western Democratic Regimes 4.24a

Mabel Berezin Cornell University:

Place and Dis-Placement as Threat to Democracy

András Bozóki Central European University, Vienna: The Rise of

Authoritarianism in the European Union: The Case of Hungary

Monika Florczak-Wątor University of Kraków: The Capture of the

Polish Constitutional Tribunal and Its Impact on the Protection of the

Rights and Freedoms of Citizens

Session 8: Democracy under a State of Emergency? 4.24b

Zafer Yılmaz University of Potsdam: The Strategic Legalism,

Judicialization of Politics and the End of the Rule of Law in Turkey

Hassan Jabareen Adalah, Haifa: The Schmittian Constitution:

The Israeli Basic Law. The Nation State

Matthias Lemke Federal University of Applied Administrative Science,

Lübeck: 719 Days in a State of Emergency – Attempting to draw

a Balance of état d‘urgence in France

Session 9: Migration: Withholding Basic Rights of Refugees 4.25

Özge Yaka University of Potsdam: The Migrant and the Demos:

Democracy in the Age of Anxiety

Oliver Schmidtke University of Victoria: International Migration,

Rights and the Retreat of Inclusive Citizenship Rules

Max Oliver Schmidt University of Potsdam: Fighting for Access to

Democratic Societies – Church Asylum as Ultima Ratio

Coffee Break

Parallel Sessions

Session 10: The Demise of Democracy in Turkey 4.24a

Ertuğ Tombuş Humboldt University Berlin: From Representation to

Incarnation: Populism and Autocracy in Turkey

Ulaş Şener University of Potsdam: From Neoliberal to Populist

Monetary Policy? Reflections on the Turkish Case

Session 11: Prospects of Democratic Movements in Northern Africa and the

Middle East 4.24b

Jessica Ayesha Northey Coventry University: The Algerian Hirak –

Civil Society, Non-violence and the New Movement for Democracy

Benoit Challand Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa: The Dialectics of

State-Society Relations and the Prospect for Arab Citizenships.

Tunisia and Yemen in Comparative Perspective

14:15 – 16:40

16:45 – 17:20

17:25 – 19:00


Session 12: Fighting for Democracy and Citizenship Rights 4.25

Munir Nuseibah Al Quds University, East Jerusalem: Municipal

Elections in Occupied Jerusalem: Why do Palestinians Boycott?

Zeynep Kıvılcım Humboldt University Berlin: The Fate of

Radical Democracy: Stateless Democracy in Rojava, Syria

Sightseeing Potsdam (Bus Tour)

Keynote

Jenny Pearce London School of Economics:

Democratic Participation and the Violence of Politics: Towards a Post-

Weberian Enlightenment 4.24a

Parallel Sessions

Session 13: Democracy under Right-Wing Governments 4.24a

Rosario Forlenza New York University and Bryan S. Turner

Australian Catholic University/ University of Potsdam: Roman Catholicism and Democracy – Internal Conservatism and External Liberalism?

Gregor Fitzi University of Potsdam:

Italy’s Transition to Post-Democracy

Session 14: Democracy and the Permanence of Violence 4.24b

Helga Baumgarten Birzeit University, Palestine: Violent

Settler-colonialism, Authoritarian Rule, and the Struggle

for Democratic Space

Scott Bollens University of California, Irvine: Political Resistance

and Contested Citizenship: Palestine and Northern Ireland

Session 15: Democracy and the Permanence of Colonialism 4.25

John Holmwood University of Nottingham: Colonialism,

Postcolonialism and the Liberal Welfare State

Thiven Reddy University of Cape Town: Settler Colonialism

and the Failure of Liberal Democracy

Conclusion 4.24a

19:30

Saturday, July 13

10:00 – 11:00

11:10 – 12:45

14:00 – 14:30


Abstracts

Tim Anderson

How Colonial Intervention Destroys Democracy at Home and Abroad

Human beings are social creatures with social structures which are always damaged by imperial in-

terventions. These must be rebuilt after interventions, for society to properly function and reproduce

itself. In the post-colonial era international law banned war and colonisation, while recognising the

right of peoples to self-determination. However interests disguised in idealistic terms kept advancing

imperial plans, to dominate entire regions and seize control of their resources. The artificial claims

of ‚humanitarian intervention‘ and a ‚responsibility to protect‘ have been used to ‚re-normalise‘ war,

using exceptional fabrications to fit exceptional pretexts. This propaganda can only be penetrated by

(1) identifying and discounting interested / self-serving statements, and (2) making use of independent

evidence and admissions against interest (post-colonial forensic principles). Whatever their pretext, all

the Middle East wars of the 21st Century have been basically colonial in character, a phenomenon which

not only damages the colonised societies, but also the colonisers. It is important to distinguish the

primary from secondary consequences of these interventions. The primary have to do with the destruc-

tion of accountability and of the necessarily anti-social damage to social structures. The secondary are

backwash effects: conflict, death and destruction, deception and the destruction of accountability in the

imperial cultures, damage to trust and ‚normal‘ international relations and the stimulus of mercenary

and war economies. All this means that the new colonialism acts to destroy democracy at home, as well

as abroad.

Helga Baumgarten

Violent Settler-Colonialism, Authoritarian Rule, and the Struggle for Democratic Space

This paper takes an in-depth look, on the micro-level, into the Palestinian struggle for democratic space,

in the context of violent settler-colonialism on a first level, internal Palestinian authoritarian rule on a

second level. Examples are taken from three fields, local government (both, on the part of the local elite,

and on the part of women’s struggle from below), strikes organized outside official unions (teachers’

strike 2016) and finally NGOs, here the NGO consortium of AMAN, with a focus on its last report 2019

and its head-on criticism of the Palestinian Authority.


Mabel Berezin

Place and Dis-placement as Threat to Democracy

This is a paper about the role of marginality in the pre-disposition towards illiberal politics. It looks at

the issue of “dis-placement” – absolute or perceived loss of culture, status and economic security in the

move towards fracturing democracy. The paper will use recent demographic and geographic studies of

the relation between place and politics.

Thomas Biebricher

The Problem of Democracy: Neoliberal Critique and the Impossibility of Reform

Despite the differences in the specific diagnoses, neoliberal thinkers concur that democracy figures

prominently in what I call the ‘neoliberal problematic’ underlying their agenda. However, while they

offer numerous proposals for how democracies ought to be reformed, they are incapable of sketching

a pathway that would bring about these reforms. I conclude that neoliberalism is caught in a dilemma:

Either it sticks to its critiques but consequently is unable to develop a consistent reform strategy, or it

sticks to the possibility of implementing its reform plans and is thus forced to discard the assumptions

informing its analytical framework.

Scott A. Bollens

Political Resistance and Contested Citizenship: Palestine and Northern Ireland

I examine the dynamics of resistance by citizens and identity groups to the implementation of national

political agendas. My talk investigates two urban settings in which national policies operate amid con-

tested citizenship and disputed political sovereignty. These are Israel’s program aimed at sole sovereign

control of Jerusalem and Northern Ireland’s effort to build peace in Belfast. I base my findings on seven

months of in-country research and 122 interviews conducted 2015 and 2016. Political goals of united

Jerusalem in Israel and shared future in Northern Ireland are obstructed during local implementation.

Difficulty in implementing national policy directives in a contested environment provides opportunity

spaces that members of confrontational and mobilized ethnic and cultural groups exploit in ways to

counteract national dictates. Unwilling to engage with formal governance institutions and asserting

territorial claims, this capacity of mobilized opposition occurs in fundamentally different national pro-

grams, illuminating the inherent disruptive quality of intransigent urban interests to resist national

mandates.


András Bozóki

The Rise of Authoritarianism in the European Union: The Case of Hungary

The presentation focuses on the unique, role model characteristics of the Hungarian hybrid regime,

the Hungarian political system’s new incarnation forged in the past years’ democratic backsliding pro-

cess. Following the short review of the main hybrid regime literature and the key analyses putting the

democratic quality of the Hungarian political system under the microscope, I argue that Hungary’s EU

membership, the competencies of EU institutions and the scope of EU law, has played a crucial role in

the development of the system’s unique characteristics which qualifies Hungary as an “externally con-

strained hybrid regime”. However, the EU does not only fulfil system constraining functions regarding

the Hungarian regime, but performs system support and system legitimation functions as well. The

presentation will also focus on the new European power balance and its relationship with Hungarian

politics, particularly the role of the European People’s Party, after the European Parliamentary elections.

Benoit Challand

The Dialectics of State-Society Relations and the Prospect for Arab Citizenships.

Tunisia and Yemen in Comparative Perspective

State-society relations have been the focus of various studies in historical sociology dealing with the

Middle East. N. Ayubi (1995) has set his analysis of the Arab state in relation to various societal con-

figurations and patterns of state-making, while L. Anderson (1986) and M. Charrad (2001) helped us

understand patterns of state management (with more or less reliance on clientele) and gender policies.

This presentation is an attempt to re-read the transformations that were ushered by 2011 Arab uprisings,

both in terms of positive and negative citizenship, and in relation to particular national configurations.

It concentrates on two cases, Tunisia and Yemen, in which the “people” enjoyed a certain degree of

involvement in deliberating a new constitutional order in 2014.

Vedran Dzihic

Authoritarian Populist Nationalism as a Threat to European Democracies. Conceptual Considerations and

Empirical Insights


Tibor Dessewffy

May the Revitalization of Politics come from Public Culture?

I propose to describe the present crisis of legitimacy of and trust in liberal democracies herein in emo-

tional terms. Different populist forces of the world are similar in their ability to emotionally organize

and mobilize their supporters, often against their economic and political interest. Democratic forces are

losing ground, unable emotionally involve enough supporters. Politics as usual, for most of the people,

become hopelessly boring. (Social sciences are not innocent in this process of “making the social in-

different” either.) This presentation examines whether the revival of democracy can come from popular

culture, which young people, who are not available with traditional political vocabulary, are intensively

consuming and where emotions are abundant.

Gregor Fitzi

Italy’s Transition to Post-democracy

Colin Crouch proposed the category of post-democracy in 2003 to analyse the development of liberal-

democratic political systems in the age of neo-liberalism. Here self-referential elites govern with less and

less participation from the side of the electorate who becomes increasingly politically apathetic. Yet, in

the last 15 years political praxis brought two further developments to the fore: the rise of right-wing poli-

tical entrepreneurship and the substantial decomposition of political culture. These developments need

to be inquired into with reference to the Italian case study, because Italy is a political laboratory where

political pathologies develop that extend later to other European countries, as was the case in the 20th

century. The presentation will illustrate three stages of Italy’s transition to new forms of post-democracy

that increasingly simulate and disrupt bottom-up political participation. 1. The growing orientation of

political praxis toward short-term polls in the age of Berlusconi’s governments (2001-2006 and 2008-

2011). 2. The fake direct-democracy organized by the private software company who owns the Five stars

movement (2009 until now). 3. Salvini’s tactic for the disarticulation of the political discourse through

the change of contents in political communication in a two days rhythm (2013 until now). In the final

summary the presentation will sketch a diagnosis of the typological aspects of the pathological develop-

ment of democracy that can be observed in the Italian case study.


Monika Florczak-Wątor

The Capture of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal and Its Impact on the Protection

of the Rights and Freedoms of Citizens

One of the tasks of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal is to protect the constitutional rights and free-

doms of individuals by eliminating unconstitutional provisions from the legal order that violate these

rights and freedoms. This task is realized, among others, through a constitutional complaint, whose po-

sitive consideration by the Tribunal may finally lead to the repeal of a court decision issued on the basis

of a provision announced as unconstitutional. In accomplishing these tasks, the Court should protect

the individual against the legislative activity of the parliamentary majority. However, if the Tribunal is

subordinated to the parliamentary majority, as has been the case in Poland since December 2016, this

Tribunal ceases to be a defender and guarantor of individual rights and freedoms. The presentation of

statistical data will bring us to the conclusion that the activity of the Tribunal in the area of the protection

of individual rights and freedoms in the last three years has been significantly reduced, and in some

situations, it has even ceased to exist. The decline in public trust in the Court has resulted in a drastic

reduction in the number of cases referred to this organ by courts and citizens. The number of judgments

issued by the Tribunal every month has also decreased significantly. Moreover, the Tribunal gave up the

pro-citizen interpretation of the Constitution, arguing for the interpretation that implements the policy

of the current parliamentary majority. The Tribunal has also obviously prioritized cases initiated by the

politicians of the ruling political party, which has resulted in an increase in waiting times for ordinary

citizens’ cases to be considered. On the basis of particular cases adjudicated upon by the “new” Tribunal

over the past three years, it will be shown that the activities of the Tribunal not only fail to serve in pro-

tecting individuals’ rights and freedoms, but also constitute a real threat to such rights and freedoms.

Rosario Forlenza and Bryan S. Turner

Roman Catholicism and Democracy – Internal Conservatism and External Liberalism?

In sociology and politics, Catholicism is typically compared unfavourably with Protestantism in terms

of support for modernity in general and democracy in particular. Protestantism is presented as the

counterfoil to the historical analysis of Catholicism as a conservative force which sided with fascism in

Europe in the first half of the twentieth century and with authoritarian regimes in Latin America in the

second half. In this lecture we examine the question of democracy and Catholicism along two dimensi-

ons: the internal authority structure of the Church and its external dimension in relation to the realm

of secular politics, and treat Vatican II (1962-65) as a critical turning point in the Church’s relationship

with these two dimensions. First we question to what extent its internal hierarchical structures remain

in tension with modern notions of democratic participation. The contemporary crises around sex scan-

dals inside the Church raise profound questions as to how far internal reform and democratization has


gone. Subsequently, we consider the consequences of Vatican II in terms of the external involvement of

the Church in secular politics through Christian Democratic parties. The Council encouraged Catholics

to support pluralism and democracy. In fact Christian Democracy had embraced these causes since the

end of World War II, contributing to a redefinition of Catholicism as a project compatible with political

modernity. Our conclusion examines what we refer to as ‘the long Protestantization of Catholicism’ and

reflect on a remaining puzzle – the combination of internal undemocratic authoritarianism and external

political liberalism in the shape of Christian democracy.

Peo Hansen

Refugee Reception or Welfare State Sustainability, or Both? Explaining Sound Finance’s Toxic Impact

on Migration Politics and Policy in the European Union

The political establishment and research community are in basic agreement that refugees make up a

negative fiscal position, or a net cost for the receiving society. As Ruhs (2013: 46) and others postulate:

“The lower the skills and earnings of migrants in the host country, the greater will be the strictly eco-

nomic case for restricting some of their welfare rights in order to minimize the fiscal costs for existing

residents.” This presentation looks closer at the claims regarding the fiscal position of refugees and the

notion of there being a trade-off between migration and the welfare state. I will argue that the consen-

sus is built on a false and fundamentally misleading premise concerning government spending, one

linked to the equally mistaken government-household analogy that buttresses the EU’s “sound” fiscal

framework. In politics as well as scholarship, then, the constraints that sound finance imposes on, let’s

say, government spending on refugee integration are treated as were they determined by economic

laws. They are approached as economic givens rather than what they really are, namely political choices

and man-made rules that constrain economic policy and fiscal options. Sound finance, I will therefore

argue, poisons migration politics and policy in the EU; it corroborates what the extreme right has always

claimed and it leaves progressive politics little option but to fumblingly say that “we can afford it”, me-

aning we can afford to spend on refugees if we spend less on other budget items. To demonstrate the

(affordability) fallacy involved in the trade-off claim and sound finance logic, I will use empirical evidence

from Sweden and the consequences of its massive refugee spending in 2015–2016.

Eddie Hartmann and Felix Lang

The Crisis of Social Trust in Nonviolent Routines. The Rise of Right-Wing Political Violence in Germany

Democracies are always characterised by the particular relationship they maintain with violence. Howe-

ver, the issue here is not a democracy’s relationship with violence per se but rather the extent to which

social actors interpret violent interactions as violent and characterise them as prohibited, permitted,


or mandated. Obviously, these areas or zones of violence are not self-evident but subject to constant

social struggle over the production of cultural meanings and hence to processes of historical transfor-

mation. Nevertheless, in modern democracies, it is first and foremost the state’s monopoly on violence

that guarantees a particular order of these zones and therefore becomes a prerequisite for social trust

in nonviolent routines of social life. Against this backdrop, our paper argues that the stability of these

zones is no longer perceived as being guaranteed and their particular order as being legitimate, and

that we are witnessing a historical phase of intensive struggles for their rearrangement. One possible

outcome of such a rearrangement is that trust in nonviolent routines can reappear as trust in violence,

that is, a reorientation of social trust that we conceive as radicalisation. This is the empirical context of

larger social change in which the current rise of right-wing political violence in Germany unfolds. We

would like to outline this argument on the basis of an empirical case study on the so-called “Bürgerwehr

Freital”, a semi-clandestine group of right-wing activists which carried out at least five explosive attacks

on refugees and political opponents in the Saxon Freital and neighbouring Dresden between June and

November 2015.

John Holmwood

Colonialism, Postcolonialism and the Liberal Welfare State

This talk (written with Gurminder K. Bhambra) addresses the colonial and racial origins of the liberal

welfare state. Most commentators represent it through the centrality of the commodified status of la-

bour power expressing a logic of market relations. Instead, we argue that with a proper understanding of

the relations of capitalism and colonialism, the sale of labour power as a commodity already represents

a movement away from the commodified form of labour represented by enslavement. European coloni-

alism is integral to the development of welfare states and their forms of inclusion and exclusion remain

racialised through into the twenty-first century.

Hassan Jabareen

The Schmittian Constitution: The Israeli Basic Law. The Nation State

The 2018 Basic Law: Israel – The Nation-State of the Jewish People illustrates the paradigmatic case of

illiberal democracy in theory and in practice. This law provides that the Land of Israel is the historical

homeland of the Jewish people, and only the Jewish people are entitled to self-determination in the State

of Israel. The paper will open with an analysis of the liberal Zionists’ opposition to the law. This group

argues that there is no need for such a law, as Israel is a Jewish state; it creates alienation with the Pales-

tinian citizens; and it damages Israel’s image as a democracy internationally. How can we understand

this position when this group has supported Israeli Supreme Court decisions justifying the idea of a Je-


wish state based on ethnic homogeneity and when this law more or less mirrors these judgments? I will

argue that Israeli legal culture explains the nature of this opposition. This culture is based on two contra-

dictory factors: the effect of international law for legitimacy and decisionism (taking decisions with a lack

of legislative authorization). This paper will contend that due to historical trajectories, Israel avoided,

with very few exceptions, legislating direct ethnic laws. However, to build a Jewish state that exercises

democracy in Palestine, which is inhabited by native Palestinians, the state opted for decisionism.

Carl Schmitt’s theory on democracy provides a good explanation regarding this culture of decisionism.

For Schmitt, Rousseau’s ‘general will’ is the will of the founding people based on homogeneity, and this

will does not need to be regulated in order to continue to control constitutionalism through decisio-

nism. The Nation-State Law illustrates this Schmittian constitutional identity as the paradigm of anti-

liberal democracy. Still, this paper will show that Schmitt’s theory failed to acknowledge that the Court

is also able to protect such ‘general will’, and to recognize that legitimacy is not dependent only on the

people’s will, but it also needs international recognition.

Bob Jessop

The Political Crisis of Neoliberalization and Multi-Spatial Meta-governance

Neoliberalization is a variegated set of projects to complete the world-market. Its finance-dominated

variant rests on political rather than rational capitalism and has global horizons of action. This under-

mines the elective affinity between capitalism and democracy. Moreover, because finance-dominated

accumulation increases inequalities of income and wealth compared with les trente glorieuses, it beco-

mes harder to reconcile the “comprehensive contradiction” in liberal democratic constitutions between

enabling the political emancipation of subaltern groups and maintaining the social entrenchment of the

dominant classes. This is reflected in the rise of authoritarian statism and enduring austerity for sub-

altern groups and in competing forms of multi-spatial metagovernance to manage the changing world

market and the repercussions of uneven development. This contribution explores the interrelations

among these tendencies.

Zeynep Kıvılcım

The Fate of Radical Democracy: Stateless Democracy in Rojava, Syria

The presentation aims to investigate on the new modes of sovereignty and of citizenship in Democratic

Federation of Northern Syria commonly known as Rojava, where principles of the Eurocentric doctrine

of liberal democracy are renegotiated. I investigate the articulations of sovereignty within the model of

‘democratic autonomy’ in Rojava with a focus on the legal practices that tend towards the decentralizati-

on of hierarchical sovereignty and the self-government of stateless citizens. Democratic autonomy prob-


lematizes state-society relations, and mainly aims at the development of gender sensitive self-governing

capacities beyond the representative democracy.

The Democratic Federation of Northern Syria is politically extremely fragile in the turmoil of the Syrian

war. The talks with the Damascus government on Rojava’s de facto autonomy had reached an impasse.

The administration of the Federation that is the second largest territory holder after the Syrian govern-

ment in Syria is excluded from the Syrian constitution drafting work initiated by the United Nations. I

will discuss to which extent the experience of stateless democracy in Rojava contributes to or challenges

the conceptual and legal foundations of liberal democracy.

Matthias Lemke

719 Days in a State of Emergency – Attempting to draw a Balance of état d‘urgence in France

From November 13, 2015 to October 31st, 2017, France went through the longest state of emergency

(état d’urgence) in the history of the Fifth Republic. Triggered by terrorist attacks on various locations

in the Île de France-Region causing 130 civilian casualties, the following 719 days of state of emergency

deeply affected the balance of freedom and security. In the course of the état d’urgence, the new French

government under President Macron introduced important changes on security legislation, permitting

exceptional provisions to be applied in normal times, too. Therefore, this contribution asks what the

new normality in France after the end of the state of emergency looks like – and even more importantly:

how we got there.

Jürgen Mackert

The Legacy of Liberalism and the De-democratization of Modern Society

The paper argues that the legacy of liberalism has in the long run promoted de-democratization and

de-politicization of European liberal democracies by triggering both their neo-liberalization and the insti-

tutionalization of a democratic deficit in the EU. This tendency has been reinforced by the consequences

of the financial crisis and a politics of securitization. While sociology concentrates on processes within

single societies or the „European society“ in order to understand the consequences od these processes,

I argue that the 2015 “migration crisis” and the violence against „the migrant“ shows a resurgence of

the „dark side of liberalism“.


Nancy MacLean

Enchaining Democracy: The Now-Transnational Project of the Radical Libertarian Right

The talk will provide an overview of my findings in Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical

Right’s Stealth Plan for America and the serendipitous research path that led to them, a path that un-

derscores their stakes. Democracy in Chains reveals the unknown history of the relentless campaign by

the U.S. radical rich to eliminate unions, suppress voting, privatize everything from schools to Medicare

and Social Security, stop action on climate change, and alter the Constitution. I traced this game plan

back to the Nobel Prize-winning political economist James McGill Buchanan, who forged his ideas in an

attempt to preserve the white elite’s power in the wake of Brown v. Board of Education. Focusing on this

key figure who barely appears in the current literature on neoliberalism, the lecture will explain the ge-

nesis of today’s American pro-corporate libertarian radical right, from its beginnings in academia to the

eventual embrace and financial backing of the billionaire Charles Koch and the network of wealthy, right-

wing donors he has built. I will conclude by noting that while Democracy in Chains told a US-based story,

this cause is transnational, with a particular focus on blocking action on climate change. Its vehicle is

the Atlas Network, an international umbrella organization with over 450 affiliates in 96 countries, wor-

king with rapidly escalating success to rig the rules of democracy across the globe. I expect to weave in

some suggestive preliminary findings by journalists of Atlas affiliates’ impact on matters from Brexit to

the victory of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil and efforts by Australia’s One Nation party to enlist Koch funding

in elections—just the tip of the iceberg that researchers in affected countries could begin to explore.

What they point to is a need to stop assuming that corporate neoliberalism and right-wing populism are

opposed entities and start asking fresh questions about their relationship.

If you’d like to check the affiliates in your own country before the conference, here’s the global directory:

https://www.atlasnetwork.org/partners/global-directory

Martha Mundy

‘Beyond Legal Reference’ – the Yemen War

The Yemen war is in its fifth year. One side controls the skies, raining bombs to decimate society below,

and imposes a siege on some 20 million persons. There are massive breaches of the Geneva Conven-

tions of which all parties – save the US and Israel – signed the 1977 additional protocol. For capital,

Western governments lavish weapons and knowhow; when challenged, they invoke the hard edge of

state law – official secret, security, executive veto. None of this is truly beyond legal reference. It is rather

the decrees that facilitate the war itself, issued by the UNSC, that fall ‘beyond legal reference’.


Jessica Ayesha Northey

The Algerian Hirak – Civil Society, Non-violence and the New Movement for Democracy

Since 22 February 2019 Algerians have peacefully mobilised on an unprecedented scale for democracy.

Known as the Hirak, massive weekly marches of millions led to President Bouteflika standing down, po-

liticians, and the former secret services head being arrested and tried for corruption. This phenomenal

mobilisation has led to dramatic political transformation. Uniting civil society, it has until now remained

entirely peaceful. It is important to understand how and why Algerians have taken on such a powerful re-

gime, without violence from any side, despite deep frustrations and a history of violent political change

and the implications for future democratic reform.

Munir Nuseibah

Municipal Elections in Occupied Jerusalem: Why Do Palestinians Boycott?

Since the Israeli occupation and illegal annexation of the eastern part of Jerusalem in 1967, the Palestini-

an population of the city has been considered permanent residents in Israel. This status qualified them

to vote in municipal elections, but not in parliamentary elections. However, the Jerusalemites have been

boycotting these elections since the occupation until today. In 2018, two Palestinian blocs competed at

the municipal elections, hoping that they would break the boycott and encourage Palestinian voters, but

they both failed. This paper will examine the dilemma regarding participating in the elections.

Ilan Pappe

The Uses and Abuses of Discourse of Rights in the Case of Palestine

This talk focuses on the exceptionalism that characterises human rights approach to the case of Pa-

lestine. The paper argues that the usual universal yardsticks which form the basis for any discourse

on human rights abuses worldwide are not applied to Palestine. The paper explains the reasons for

this exceptionalism, assess its implications and will consider ways of challenging it. The international

conversation about the abuses of human rights in the Middle East since the onset of the Arab Spring

(and even before) does not include the Israeli violation of human rights within historical Palestine. From

mainstream media, through leading intellectuals and political elites, the Palestinians are included when

there is a universal condemnation of abuses of human rights either by regimes or by those opposing

them.

The reasons for this exceptionalism vary. In Europe this approach is still deeply rooted in the Holocaust

memory and guilt complex. In the USA, it is a combination of Christian fundamentalism and neo-


conservatism that allows this exceptionalism. In the rest of the world, neo-liberalism is the main motive

for exempting, not only Israel, states from international rebuke. This exceptionalism did not only prevent

any significant progress towards peace and reconciliation in Palestine, but also defined any meaningful

role for the west in the conversation about human rights in the Middle East as a whole.

Only a universal approach that is inclusive about Palestine can contribute not only to changing the

reality on the ground in Palestine, but also in the region as a whole.

Jenny Pearce

Democratic Participation and the Violence of Politics: Towards a Post-Weberian Enlightenment

This paper is written in a context in which it appears that violence rather than politics might determi-

ne the future of the planet and humanity. Yet, politics has been seen as a way to reduce violence and

transform our conflicts into other kinds of interactions. Critical to that view was the State itself, as the

legitimate monopoly of violence. Rational lawmaking and administration completed a process, albeit

a disenchanted one. As violence appears to grow both within and without our politics, the moment

has come to review our premises about the relationship between the two. A starting point is to deon-

tologize the assumptions about human violence which have given shape to what we understand to be

politics, the State and the political. Our failure to distinguish aggression from violence, and to assume

that the State is how we trade a part of our freedom for security is a starting point. As Carl Schmitt’s

shadow casts itself over the early twentieth first century, arguing that the State becomes political when it

identifies the ‘enemy’, the urgency of new theories of politics becomes apparent. When we understand

that aggression has biological roots and violence has social ones, and as social action has visibilized

violences previously not recognized as such, we see better how violence emerges and reproduces in our

social relationships, across the spaces of socialization, including the construction of the nation state

itself. Thus, this paper argues, we now know so much about violence and its reproduction, that we no

longer need to base our theories of politics on our incapacity to address it. A politics without violence

becomes a theoretical and practical possibility, though it might not look like it at this time in history.

Imagining such a politics, however, opens up debate about the potential for a distinct kind of democratic

participation and further action on the material conditions, state actions and social relationships that

reproduce violences.

Thiven Reddy

Settler Colonialism and the Failure of Liberal Democracy

My paper will focus on how we theorize a conception of politics in countries like South Africa, histori-

cally marked by settler-colonial modernity. An important description of the post 1994 democratic period


is the emergence of two different modes of politics which interact with each other in various, complex

ways. Over the last two decades these can be viewed as two different conceptions of ‘the political’ ma-

nifested in everyday political behavior: the first, more expressive of the historical and emergent middle

class embrace institutional and constitutional ‘democratic rules of the game’; the second, rooted in

mass-subaltern politics, desires to re-distribute power so that subalterns obtain symbolic recognition

and material redress through collective action. The paper will frame this discussion about democracy

and politics by drawing on the work of Schmitt and Biko.

Max Oliver Schmidt

Fighting for Access to Democratic Societies – Church Asylum as Ultima Ratio

The Genova Refugee Convention declares that persons have the right to seek asylum from persecution

in other countries. To ensure this right the EU and its member states took measures to grant equal treat-

ment regarding asylum proceedings. However, actual administrative practices differ from this façade.

Rather, the EU implemented control techniques to impose hidden and collectivist strategies of exclu-

sion inside and outside the territory of the EU. In brief, the EU and its member states exclude refugees

from asylum procedures and accordingly from their right to pursue access to democratic societies. To

defeat these exclusionary actions, church organisations showed solidarity with refugees and mobilized

resource not only to claim formal rights for the refugees, but to usurp the administrative procedure and

consequently overturn the administrative action.

The paper will analyse these conflicting practices of exclusionary and usurpationary actions within social

closure theory. Thus, it concentrates on strategies of usurpation which firstly establish new power rela-

tions between state agencies and refugees by changing the modes of ‘presence-availability’ of the refu-

gees. Secondly, it explains how church organisations manipulate the action of state authorities through

setting new rules of interaction and embedding certain religious narratives into the review process of

asylum procedures. Thirdly, it briefly illustrates how actors deploy strategies of conflict and technologies

of power in the struggle and construction of asylum practices.

Oliver Schmidtke

International Migration, Rights and the Retreat of Inclusive Citizenship Rules

Migration as a genuinely global phenomenon requires regional or global governance approaches. The

drive towards the Global Compact on Migration under the auspices of the UN is a notable move in this

direction. Yet, the nationalist backlash against immigration in general and refugees in particular has

created a political environment in which access to rights especially for irregular migrants are severely

curtailed. This presentation addresses how the access to fundamental rights associated with citizenship


has gradually been restricted in the European context and how depriving the most vulnerable migrants

of those entitlements has been employed as a political strategy of deterrence.

Christian Schmidt-Wellenburg

Drawing on Different Sources of Authority: The Changing Nature of Economic Expertise in Eurocracy

High-level European expert groups such as de-Larosière-Group (2009) or Liikanen-Group (2012) have

been controversially discussed for two reasons: the economic expertise produced and their compositi-

on. Similar stakes are at the centre of both struggles. First, what the economy is and how it should be

regulated. Second, who is deemed legitimate to articulate her/his point of view and why. Analysing the

groups’ compositions and outputs allows reconstructing relationships between EU political institutions

and different forms of expertise. Comparing these to other national and transnational economic expert

groups allows understanding their specificity as part of a new form stateness in the making.

Ulaş Şener

From Neoliberal to Populist Monetary Policy? Reflections on the Turkish Case

Over the last years Turkey has been increasingly described as a country with a soaring populism and an

authoritarian political economy, which get off the path of Western style democracy and capitalism. This

article seeks to contribute to the literature on the political economy of populism and neoliberal autho-

ritarianism, focusing on recent developments in Turkey with an emphasis on monetary policy. Starting

from an elaboration on theoretical aspects of Neoliberalism and its economic policies, I will outline the

conjunctures of a de-politicization of monetary policy and neoliberal authoritarianism with an emphasis

on their mutual contingency and inherent contradictions in the case of Turkey.

Margaret R. Somers

Can Citizenship save Democracy from Market Justice? Why Karl Polanyi is the Necessary Thinker for Our Times

Today’s crises of dedemocratization and radical inequality are the same as those Karl Polanyi identified

as the preconditions to fascism and the products of market “utopianism.” Capitalism invented “mar-

ket justice”—that market outcomes are morally deserved—from the utopianism of market naturalism,

which justified social exclusion and laid the predicate for democracy as mortal threat. Polanyi demysti-

fied the utopianism of market justice to reveal its predistributive political engineering, making the mar-

ket an allocative institution of power that, in 1930s Europe, drove social exclusion, dedemocratized, and


facilitated authoritarianism. But predistribution is contingent; its constitutive state power is comprised

of social goods and collective wealth—that is to say, by citizenship as an accumulated and inherited

public good. In America’s New Deal, progressive forces dodged the “fascist virus” by subordinating

market justice to the public good of citizenship. Can citizenship be again mobilized to save democracy

from market justice?

Ertuğ Tombuş

From Representation to Incarnation: Populism and Autocracy in Turkey

The relation between populism and democracy is one of the central disputes in populism studies. This

papers aims to shed light on this relation by explaining populism as a particular kind of representation

claim, which follows a trajectory as populist actor moves from opposition to power. This trajectory, the

paper argues, starts from representing the voice of the people and develops into a claim of incarnation.

Understanding this trajectory not only brings temporality into discussion but also goes beyond the left-

right populism distinction to explain populism’s effects on democratic system. To make this theoretical

argument, the paper uses populism in Turkey in the last two decades as its substantiating case.

Stephen Turner

The Ideology of Anti-populism and the Administrative State

Conventional accounts of liberal democracy tend to obscure a basic fact: the phenomenon of administ-

ration. The American reception of the administrative state was self-consciously imitative of Continental

models of state bureaucracy, as a remedy for the ills of democratic politics, but construed as a means of

saving democracy from itself, from populism, and from lawyers and legalism, in the name of efficiency.

This produced its own ideology, which pervades present discussion of populism.

Joseph Vogl

The Financial Regime

Modernity has given rise not merely to the sovereign state apparatus, to international trade companies, to

influential financiers, to decentralized markets... It has also witnessed the formation of a particular type of

power that cannot be properly described in terms either of political structures or of economic strategies.

This type of power is constituted, instead, by the interpenetration of these poles. From the integration of

private creditors into the politics of early modern states, to the creation of central banks and public credit,


all the way up to today’s capitalism of financial markets, we can trace the emergence of a type of “economic

governance” that ultimately has immunized itself against the democratization of political power.

Özge Yaka

The Migrant and the Demos: Democracy in the Age of Anxiety

Migration, again, is being discussed as a cause for the crisis of Western democracies in the last few

years both within academic and public discourse. A more accurate description would be that migration

and the “refugee crisis” exposed the fragilities of the relationships between the spheres of the social, the

economy and the political, expressed in the notion of “democracy”. The controversy surrounding the

admission (or rejection) of refugees was centred around two paradigmatic arguments: The first addres-

ses the “scope” of democracy, or, the failure of democratic governance to provide adequate conditions

for “substantial citizenship” (Arjun Appadurai). A failure, which in turn has been interpreted by many

scholars as one of the main dynamics to foster anti-migrant sentiments, fears and collective anxieties

(Zygmunt Bauman). The second argument can be described as result of the recent shift in political cul-

ture, mainly achieved by right-wing populist parties: The rearticulation of the concept of “demos” (com-

mon people) on the basis of race, ethnicity and religion (also signified by the term “culture”). Against

this background, the paper explores the idea of demos and democracy in relation with the figure of the

migrant, utilizing critical theories of democracy such as the works of, Balibar, Ranciere and Derrida.

Zafer Yılmaz

The Strategic Legalism, Judicialization of Politics and the End of the Rule of Law in Turkey

Turkish president Erdoğan and the AKP government initiated a comprehensive restoration process right

after the failed coup in mid-July 2016. In fact, the country experiences a very comprehensive and violent

regime transformation. The new strategic legalism of the AKP has been playing a highly critical role in

the organization of a regime change in that context. It combines total subordination of the judiciary to

the executive with subtle judicial repression strategies so as to demobilize all sources of opposition and

suppress the emergence of any possible alternatives within current power bloc as well. To shed light on

the ways in which current legal practices providing the necessary authority to President Erdoğan and

the AKP government for regime transformation, I will discuss the main characteristics of the Party’s

strategic legalism, which reduces rule of law to the rule by law approach, executive prerogative principle,

and law as technique of demobilization. Consequently, I will argue that the impacts of this model of

legality will go beyond the national borders of the country since it provides a new legal model for other

authoritarian regimes as well.


Participants

Tim Anderson

Dr., is Director of the Sydney-based Centre for Counter Hegemonic Studies. He worked at Australian

universities for more than 30 years. His recent books include: Land and Livelihoods in Papua New Guinea

(2015), The Dirty War on Syria (2016, in ten languages), and Axis of Resistance (2019).

Helga Baumgarten

taught Political Science at Birzeit University. Among her publications are Palaestina. Befreiung in den

Staat (Suhrkamp 1991), also available in Arabic (Muwatin 2006), and Kampf um Palaestina: Was wollen

Hamas und Fatah? (Herder 2014), as well as her article The Oslo System (INAMO 79, 2014), available in

English on academia.edu.

Mabel Berezin

Professor of Sociology at Cornell, writes on challenges to democratic solidarity in Europe and the Uni-

ted States. Her works include Illiberal Politics in Neoliberal Times: Culture, Security, and Populism in the

New Europe (Cambridge, 2009). Her current writing focuses on extreme nationalism in contemporary

Europe.

Thomas Biebricher

is a political theorist. Currently he is a Post-Doc at the Cluster of Excellence ‘The Formation of Norma-

tive Orders’ at the Goethe-University in Frankfurt. His The Political Theory of Neoliberalism has just been

published by Stanford University Press.

Scott A. Bollens

is Professor and Warmington Endowed Chair of Peace and International Cooperation, University of

California, Irvine. He studies urbanism and political conflict in contested cities. His recent book is Tra-

jectories of Conflict and Peace: Jerusalem and Belfast since 1994 (London and New York: Routledge, 2018).


András Bozóki

is Professor of Political Science at the Central European University (CEU), Budapest, Hungary. His

research interest are comparative politics in East Central Europe, democratization, hybrid regimes, po-

litical ideas, and the role of the intellectuals.

His books include Ars Politica (2007), Virtual Republic (2012) and others.

Benoit Challand

is Associate Professor in Sociology at the Scuola Normale Superiore in Florence. He holds a PhD from

the EUI in Florence (2005) and has published on civil society in the Arab world from a variety of facets:

Foreign aid for civil society (Palestinian Civil Society. The Power to Promote and Exclude, 2008), Islamic

charities (2007 article in IJMES), and popular mobilizations in the 2011 Arab Uprisings (2011 and 2013

articles in Constellations).

Tibor Dessewffy

is a sociologist, a Chair at the Department of Social Psychology at ELTE, Faculty of Social Sciences,

Budapest. He received his PhD from the University of Amsterdam in 1997. He was a visiting fellow of

Boston University and New School for Social Research. In 2010 he was a Fulbright scholar at USC, Los

Angeles. His main fields of interest are digital sociology, digital cultures, sociology of the everyday life,

cultural impacts of technology and politics in the network Society.

Vedran Dzihic

Dr., is a senior researcher at the oiip (Austrian Institute for International Affairs) and lecturer at the

University of Vienna. He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow at the Center for Transatlantic Relations,

School of Advanced International Studies, John Hopkins University, Washington D.C. His field of re-

search are related to democracy and transition processes, European integration, civil society and protest

movements, foreign policy, conflict research, and nationalism. His regional focus lies on Eastern and

Southeastern Europe and the USA.

Gregor Fitzi

is a co-director of the Centre for Citizenship, Social Pluralism and Religious Diversity at University of

Potsdam, Germany. He was interim full professor for General Sociology and Sociological Theory at the


University of Bielefeld, in Germany (2015-2016). He has been visiting professor at the University of

Montréal, at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris and at the Graduate Center, City

University of New York. Recent publications: – The Challenge of Modernity. Simmel’s Sociological Theory.

Abingdon-New York: Routledge (2019).

Monika Florczak-Wątor

is a professor at the Constitutional Law Department of the Jagiellonian University in Poland, an attorney-

at-law, a member of the executive board of the Polish Association of Constitutional Law, and a member

of the European Group of Public Law. From 2004 to 2017 she was a clerk at the Office of the Constitu-

tional Tribunal.

Rosario Forlenza

is a Fellow at the Remarque Institute, New York University, and an Associate Research Scholar at Pots-

dam University’s Center for Citizenship, Social Pluralism, and Religious Diversity. He is a historian of

modern Europe and has worked at the University of Cambridge, Princeton University, Columbia Uni-

versity, and the University of Padova. Recent books include On the Edge of Democracy: Italy 1943-1948

(Oxford University Press, 2019).

Peo Hansen

is Professor of Political Science at the Institute for Research on Migration, Ethnicity and Society (REME-

SO), Linköping University. His research focuses on European integration, migration policy, citizenship,

political economy, colonialism and postwar European geopolitics. His most recent book is Eurafrica:

The Untold History of European Integration and Colonialism (with Stefan Jonsson). He is currently writing

a book on Europe’s migration crises.

Eddie Hartmann

is a Visiting Professor for political sociology at the Max Weber Institute for Sociology at the University

of Heidelberg. His research focuses on sociological theory, political sociology, and the sociology of

violence. He has recently published “Die Gewalttheorie von Jan Philipp Reemtsma. Programmatische

Impulse für eine Allgemeine Soziologie der Gewalt” (Zeitschrift für Theoretische Soziologie, 1, 2019, p.

74-85).


John Holmwood

is Professor of sociology at the University of Nottingham. In 2014-15 he was a member of the Institute

for Advanced Study, Princeton. He is author (with Therese O’Toole) of Countering Extremism in British

Schools? The Truth about the Birmingham Trojan Horse Affair.

Hassan Jabareen

is a lawyer and the founder and General Director of Adalah – The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights

in Israel. Over the last 25 years, he has litigated scores of landmark cases regarding Palestinian human

rights both in Israel and in the 1967 Occupied Territory before the Israeli Supreme Court. He is also

an Adjunct Lecturer in the Faculty of Law at Tel Aviv University. He has received several awards for

outstanding public interest lawyering and top human rights law prizes. Hassan was a Yale World Fellow

in 2005-6, and a Senior Robina Law Fellow in 2012-13 at Yale Law School and a research fellow at the

Wissenschaftskolleg in Berlin in 2015-16.

Bob Jessop

is Distinguished Professor of Sociology at Lancaster University, UK. He is best known for his contri-

butions to strategic-relational state theory, critical governance studies, and cultural political economy.

He is currently writing a book on Civil Society as a Mode of Governance: Between Self-Emancipation and

Self-Responsibilization.

Zeynep Kıvılcım

is an Associate Professor of public international law. She got her MA and PhD degrees from Université

Paris II and she taught at Istanbul University, Göttingen University, Osnabrück University and Hum-

boldt University. She was a fellow at the Wissenschaftskolleg, Berlin (2017-2018) and currently is an

Einstein Foundation Senior Fellow at Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.

Felix Lang

is a PhD student at the Chair of General Sociology and an associate researcher at the Centre for Citizen-

ship, Social Pluralism and Religious Diversity at the University of Potsdam. His PhD project deals with

the rise of right-wing violence in Germany since 2015. His research interests include political violence,

right-wing extremism as well as discourse and field analysis.


Jürgen Mackert

is Professor of Sociology and a co-director of the ‘Centre for Citizenship, Social Pluralism and Religious

Pluralism’ at Potsdam University, Germany. His research interests are in sociology of citizenship, politi-

cal economy, liberalism and neo-liberalism, democracy, closure theory, and settler colonialism.

Nancy MacLean

is the William H. Chafe Professor of History and Public Policy at Duke University and the award-winning

author, most recently, of Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical Right’s Stealth Plan for

America, a finalist for the National Book Award and the winner of the Los Angeles Times Book Award in

Current Affairs and the Lillian Smith Book Award.

Martha Mundy

is Professor Emerita of Anthropology at the London School of Economics. Major books are Domestic

Government: Kinship, community and polity in North Yemen (1995) and (with R Saumarez Smith) Gover-

ning Property, Making the Modern State: Law, administration and production in Ottoman Syria (2007). See

also Thimar: www.athimar.org .

Jessica Ayesha Northey

Dr., is Director of Postgraduate Research at the Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations at Coventry

University. She is country expert for Algeria with the Bertelsmann Foundation Transformation Index and

is the author of Civil Society in Algeria: Activism, Engagement and the Democratic Process (2018).

Munir Nuseibah

is a human rights lawyer and academic based in Al-Quds University in Jerusalem, Palestine. He is an as-

sistant professor at Al-Quds University‘s faculty of law; the director (and co-founder) of Al-Quds Human

Rights Clinic, the first accredited clinical legal education program in the Arab World; and the director of

the Community Action Center in Jerusalem. He holds a B.A. degree in Law from Al-Quds University; an

LL.M in International Legal Studies from the Washington College of Law of the American University in

Washington DC and a PhD degree from the University of Westminster in London, UK, which he acqui-

red after successfully defending his thesis entitled: Forced Displacement in the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict,

International Law, and Transitional Justice.


Ilan Pappe

Professor of History, Director of the European Centre for Palestine Studies and a fellow in the Institute

of Arab and Islamic Studies at the University of Exeter, United Kingdom. Professor Pappe holds a BA

from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and a D Phil from University of Oxford. He has published 20

books, among them The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine (2007), The Modern Middle East (2010, 2012) and

On Palestine (with Noam Chomsky in 2016). His most recent book is The Biggest Prison on Earth: A

History of the Israeli Occupation (2017).

Thiven Reddy

is an Associate Professor and HoD in the Political Studies Department at the University of Cape Town,

South Africa. He has published books and articles on South African politics. His interests focus on the

relationship between colonial impacts on politics. He recently published South Africa, Settler-Colonialism

and the Failures of Liberal Democracy.

Max Oliver Schmidt

is a research associate at the Chair of General Sociology. He was Doctoral Researcher at the DFG-Re-

search Training Group ‘Wicked Problems, Contested Administrations: Knowledge, Coordination, Strate-

gy’. He was a research associate and taught at the Chair of Organizational and Administrative Sociology.

He holds a M.A., Military Studies – Military Sociology/History, University of Potsdam. His research is

on social closure theory, forced migration and organisation theory.

Oliver Schmidtke

is a Professor in Political Science and History at the University of Victoria where he currently also serves

as the director of the Centre for Global Studies. He received his PhD from the European University

Institute in Florence. His research interests are in the fields of migration, citizenship, nationalism, and

populism.

Christian Schmidt-Wellenburg

is an Assistance Professor of Sociology at Potsdam University and currently fellow at Käte Hamburger Kolleg

Law as Culture, Bonn. Current publications are: “Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft aus feldanalytischer Sicht” ZfD 7(2),

2019; “Struggling over Crisis”, HSR 43(3), 2018; “Europeanization, Stateness, and Professions” EJCPS, 4(4), 2017.


Ulaş Şener

completed a doctorate in economics and is currently a PostDoc and Research Assistant at the Chair of

International Economics at the University of Potsdam. His main areas of research include International

Political Economy, Monetary Policy and Theory, Populism. His PhD won the Jörg Huffschmid Award

2017 for Political Economy.

Margaret R. Somers

Professor Emerita of Sociology and History, University of Michigan, specializes in the work of Karl Po-

lanyi and the political economy of citizenship. Genealogies of Citizenship: Markets, Statelessness, and the

Right to have Rights (2008) explains how market governance transforms citizenship into statelessness.

The Power of Market Fundamentalism: Karl Polanyi’s Critique (2014) examines how the alchemy of the

“free” market obscures the state-driven redistribution of wealth.

Ertuğ Tombuş

is a research associate at the Department of Social Sciences, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, and the

academic coordinator of Blickwechsel: Contemporary Turkey Studies Program. He holds a Ph.D. in

political science and currently completing a book manuscript titled Life-Cycle of a Populist: Populism and

its Trajectory in Turkey.

Bryan S. Turner

is Professor of Sociology and Director of the Institute for Religion Politics and Society at the Australian

Catholic University, Honorary Professor and Director of the Centre for Citizenship at Potsdam University

Germany, and Emeritus Professor at the Graduate Center at the City University of New York. He is the

founding editor of the Journal of Classical Sociology. He recently edited the Blackwell Wiley Encyclopedia

for Social Theory (2018) and published (with Alan Shipman and June Edmunds) The New Power Elite

(Anthem, 2018). He was awarded a Doctor of Letters by Cambridge University in 2009 and received the

Max Planck Award in social science in 2015.

Stephen Turner

is currently Distinguished University Professor at the Department of Philosophy, University of South

Florida, USA. His books include Liberal Democracy 3.0: Civil Society in an Age of Experts (2003) and es-


says collected in The Politics of Expertise (2013). He has also written extensively on Max Weber, especially

on politics, in Max Weber and the Dispute Over Reason and Value: A Study in Philosophy, Ethics, and Politics

1984, and Max Weber: The Lawyer as Social Thinker, 1994 (with Regis A. Factor).

Joseph Vogl

is Professor of German Literature, Cultural and Media Studies at the Humboldt University in Berlin

and Permanent Visiting Professor at Princeton University. Recent monographs: On Tarrying (2011), The

Specter of Capital (2014), The Ascendancy of Finance (2017).

Özge Yaka

has received her PhD in Sociology from Lancaster University in 2011. Since then, she has held post-

doctoral and professorial positions in Turkey, France and Germany. She is currently an Alexander von

Humboldt PSI Fellow at the Centre for Citizenship, Social Pluralism and Religious Diversity, Universität

Potsdam.

Zafer Yılmaz

is a visiting scholar (Dr.) at the Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, Potsdam University. He is

affiliated at both the Centre for Citizenship, Social Pluralism and Religious Diversity and the Chair of

Sociology at the University of Potsdam. His latest publications include “Revising the Culture of Political

Protest in Turkey after the Gezi Uprising: Radical Imagination, Affirmative Resistance and the New Poli-

tics of Desire/Dignity”, Mediterranean Quarterly, Special Issue: Erdogan and the Transformation of the

Turkey, Vol. 29, Issue, 3, September (2018).


Conference Venue

Wissenschaftsetage im Bildungsforum

Am Kanal 47

14467 Potsdam

„Platz der Einheit / Bildungsforum“

Tram 93

Tram 94

Tram 99

Bus 692

Impressum

Centre for Citizenship, Social Pluralism and Religious Diversity

August-Bebel-Str. 89

14482 Potsdam

www.uni-potsdam.de/de/centre-citizenship.html

© Universität Potsdam, Satz und Layout ZIM MultimediaTitelbild: PPstock – stock.adobe.com

Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät · The Condition of Democracy and the Fate of...

Documents

Transcript of Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät · The Condition of Democracy and the Fate of...